mbp 13 inch screen model quality

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by jpma, Jun 22, 2009.

  1. jpma macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    #1
    Hi
    I just got a mbp 2.26Ghz 13inch

    with screen model 9C9E

    I've read some got screen model 9C9F and more.
    But I find my screen is not very impressive at all
    infact, I think it's not much different form the UMB.

    is there any difference between the 2.26 & 2.53's screen?

    and some with the same 2.26Ghz model yet having different model of screen
    of different screen quality.

    Yet mine have a bad color saturation as well as a very low brightness.
     
  2. Ricanlegend macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2009
    Location:
    Bronx,Ny
  3. macproguy77 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2009
    #3
    I feel your pain.
    I want to buy a 13in MBP and in looking at it at the store, I also feel the screen is not very different from the old model and pretty much sub standard.

    I think colors/contrast did improve, but the main problem I had with this line of laptops was that the screen itself is very low brightness, even at its highest settings. And this is preventing me from buying one. (much to my dismay).

    -Mike
     
  4. jpma thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    #4
    yes,
    if everyone pay the same price
    we should all be having the same model of screen.
     
  5. NewMacbookPlz macrumors 68040

    NewMacbookPlz

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2008
    #5
    Definitely this. The factory calibration is pretty crappy.
     
  6. jpma thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    #6
    After calibration it does look bit richer but not what I expect to be called improve screen for MacBook pro would be
     
  7. hosi macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2009
    Location:
    Ireland
    #7
    Is there a big difference in displays (especially viewing angles) between MBP 13" and MBP 15"?
     
  8. pacmania1982 macrumors 6502a

    pacmania1982

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Location:
    Birmingham, UK
    #8
    I always found the white MacBook and original Unibody MacBook screens appeared a bit faded, however my 13" 2.26GHz MBP is lovely. Very punchy color and very bright. As its at home now, I don't know what model my monitor is

    pac
     
  9. jpma thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    #9
    I've done a very long calibration
    and also do a side by side compare from my early 09 15 inch mbp.

    I found the my 13inch is not as bright as my 15inch
    however it produce a better red, the red on my 15'' is somewhat dark amber.

    I also went to apple store to check out the MBA screen.
    It is better than my 13'', MBA have brighter probably better in colors too after calibration that is.

    But now it bothers me to find my 15'' can't even do a good red.
    I wonder is there something I can do about it.
     
  10. BaronvdB macrumors 6502

    BaronvdB

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    #10
    i've the the 9CBD screen on my 13" 2.53 MBP and after calibration it looks freaking awesome...too bad there is not a way to see what screen model you are getting b/f you buy it.
     
  11. captain-rossco macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2009
    Location:
    Bristol, UK
    #11
    Being a relative newb are there any particular calibration software packages people are using or just changing their original settings?

    Regards
    CR

    p.s what settings are working for you guys?
     
  12. pr33tz macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2008
    Location:
    London, UK
  13. cpnotebook80 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2007
    Location:
    Toronto
    #13
    I have the exact screen model as yours and with some color profiles from these forums, it looks great!
     
  14. tdream macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2009
    #14
    Calibration does make a difference. Mine is a 9CBD screen, and I'm happy enough with it although I would prefer a 9C9F, I won't be returning this macbook pro. Problem is with colour sensitive applications, it's not going to be colour accurate. Video and photography apps will look different on the screen no matter the calibration. My 9CBD has a yellow push which gives everything a yellow tint, and affects the greens too. On the desktop you can't tell the difference but in video you can.
     
  15. cababah macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, CA
    #15
    Aren't the 9CBD and 9C9F displays the same model/manufacturer? (LG/PHILLIPS)?
     
  16. kybernaut macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2009
    #16
    I have the same screen model (9CBD) and I definately have to second your observations. I really can't get this screen to display neutral colors. Otherwise the screen is rather good (bright, uniformly lit, acceptable viewing angles ).

    But especially video material exhibits unnatural looking skin tones (very saturated yellow/orange) and nature scenes (fluorescent greens). Also, in-room scenes with low lighting tend to look brown/yellow-tinted and a bit grainy and washed out.

    Calibration using the OSX integrated tool didn't really help the color tint/shift but at least improved visual appearance otherwise. Switching to sRGB makes video look more neutral but introduces a blue tint everywhere else. The spider2 Profile for the 9CBD posted by a user on this board is so far the best compromise to me, although colors still aren't perfect.

    I think these problems basically come down to wide color gamut (WCG) screens being fed with normal RGB values and Apple not providing suitable support for WCG in OSX. First thing for apple should be to provide better factory screen profiles that accurately describe the colorspace of the particular panels mounted. Maybe also someone with an officially WCG aware colorimeter such as spyder 3 will be able to do a better calibration profile.

    But even then, as I understand the whole WCG issue, there still is application / OS support needed to accurately map the RGB values of a particular source to the wide colorspace of the screen.

    Yes, from what I gathered, terminal app reveales "LP133WX3-TLA1" for both the 9CBD and 9C9F. Hhm, would be interesting if someone compared them side by side....

    regards,

    kybernaut
     
  17. ankit macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    #17
    Note that what you are calling WCG really has been the standard gamut display for desktop LCDs for several years. Laptop LCDs traditionally supported ~45% of the NTSC gamut, and these new ones are supposed to support ~72% of the gamut. This is the standard gamut on even the cheapest desktop LCDs. What is called "wide color gamut" typically refers to a 100% or larger gamut coverage found in newer/expensive desktop LCDs.
     
  18. jpma thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 31, 2009
    #18
    it lead me to think that there is a screen difference between the 2.26Ghz & 2.53Ghz

    can you please tell me what which model and which screen model of your 13'' mbp?

    I'm with the 2.26Ghz screen is 9C9E
     
  19. kybernaut macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2009
    #19
    That's correct, of course! But isn't the general problem still the same? Especially because every panel manufacturer seems to have its own understanding of what a "wider" gamut panel is. When every single screen model (9CBD, 9C90, 9CA0, ...) extends the gamut in different areas, they can all cover ~72% of NTSC gamut by still having a completely different color triangle. This could explain why some people are reporting purple pushs and other green or yellow ones...
     
  20. cababah macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, CA
    #20
    I have a 2.53 GHz, with a 9C9F screen.

    I am also curious to know if there is a correlation between the lower/higher end 13" MBP and screen used.
     
  21. pr33tz macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2008
    Location:
    London, UK
    #21
    I've had a 9CBD, 9C9E and a 9C9F all in the 2.26 model. Out of the three the 9C9F was the best looking.
     
  22. cababah macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, CA
    #22
    Dang..how did you get so many screens?

    Was it the "best looking" pre or post-calibration?
     
  23. pr33tz macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2008
    Location:
    London, UK
    #23
    After reading here about all the issues I exchanged the MBP until I got one that looked good to me. I calibrated them using SuperCal to the best of my ability. It was a close call between the 9CBD and 9C9F but the 9C9E wasn't as good. I had them side by side at one point so it helped me make an informed choice. It was a pain to get the right screen and it kinda sucks on Apple's part that not all of them are the same quality.
     
  24. cababah macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2009
    Location:
    SF Bay Area, CA
    #24
    Seriously. Don't you think it is kind of unfair that all of us pay the same price for the computer yet some have lower-quality screens. I think that is major garbage that people have to lottery quality parts instead of have the peace of mind knowing we are all getting the same quality across the board. We should not have to be "lucky" to get a product with optimal components.
     
  25. pr33tz macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2008
    Location:
    London, UK
    #25
    Exactly which is why I ended up buying and exchanging until I got the right screen. It's unfair and if everyone made a fuss then Apple would do something about it but we are a minority. Two Apple store I went to, they didn't even know the MBP had different LCD manufacturers. Oh well...
     

Share This Page